Amen to that. Abandon all illusions that you can just insert a hex key into that socket and screw them out, that is not going to happen. Likewise, just drilling out the socket and trying use an easy-out without eliminating the staking first is a losing proposition. It is not a good day when you break off a hardened steel easy-out. Eventually, I bought three 12" long drill bits to do this. One the same size as the top of the plug to eliminate the staking at the top, then two smaller to drill the thing out so I could drive in a robust square easy-out.
It’s probably gilding the lilly, but Spirolocks are more dependable than the common spring circlips for piston pin retention.
Of course, the presence of not one, but two BFH, AND a roll of duct tape, in the background, make Phil immediately identifiable as a pragmatic realist!
New one on me: I don’t think it’s the case. Were it so, 4-ring pistons would have been used more extensively.
AFAIK, the extra ring was to lessen oil burning, and when multiple-piece oil rings became the norm (plus overall better piston and oil ring design), the need for the 4th ring evaporated.
Might not be necessary with only 20,000 miles if the car had regular oil changes. Try blowing out the oil passages with your air compressor, then flowing a good solvent through them for awhile. Same with the passages to the main bearings in the block, which are found where the brass hex head plugs are along the right side. Try to avoid removing the brass distributor shaft bushing, but if you need to, don’t use a hammer to drive it out, press it out gently.
All welcome perspectives. I don’t know the service history of this car so have no idea if it had regular oil changes, though the inside of the block is fairly clean and the bearings look good
The sludge plugs in the crank are the only engine components not designed to be removed. I desludged the crank of my 4.2, extracting the plugs with an impact wrench and chewing up hex keys. It was a bear. The plugs in this 3.4 appear to be smaller in diameter, and very well staked.
(1) if you go Mahle, be sure it has the multi-piece oil control rings. I have the one piece and burn a quart every 300 miles.
(2) why would anyone WANT to keep rope seals when a modern seal is available? Do you like oil all over the bottom of your carefully restored car? Don’t forget rear seal and gearbox seals (shifter rods etc).
(3) upgraded radiator: I did this ( 3 row) and have never worried about overheating again. And I have to electric fan.
(4) power upgrade: is go 9:1 pistons. Cam design has come a LONG way in the last 25 years. I’d seek out performance cams that are not long duration or high overlap. Maybe check with Rob Beere in England? On Vintage alfa motors, good cam design now give both great HP at high RPM and good torque at low rpm, and they can achieve 80HP per liter on normal 93 octane pump gas.
Consider removing the plugs for the peace of mind. My car sat for 30+ years and though, like yours, original size mains and rods only needed a polish along with pistons still acceptably on their original bores, crankshaft oil passage ways were another story. My machinist said they were pretty well plugged up with sludge the consistency of clay.
Ergo, my up-thread post: modern, 3-piece oil control rings are FAR superior.
As for cams and higher compression pistons? You know me to be a liker of many upgrades, but, in this case, a well-tuned 3.4 will be the match to a 120’s chassis and brakes. The Pertronix would be the better mod.
Honest to God, I’d recommend doing the bearings, gaskets, hone the block for new rings. Upgrades are VERY slippery slope. You can easily spend $20,000 on upgrade stuff.
I just don’t get the trend for upgrades.15 years ago I restored a '68 Mustang fastback GT, a rare car over here in the UK (still got it). There was a huge fashion for converting classic Mustangs to rack and pinion, 4 wheel discs etc. I never got it - if you want that stuff, why not just buy a BMW?
By 67, Mustang V8s had the dual master and disc/drum system so I simply upgraded the pads on my convertible and had quite good braking ability…my 66 with the single master, drum/drum set=up was a different matter!
IF it needs valve guides, might as well get the type suitable for seals…otherwise, don’t go to the trouble JUST for seals…not the simplest of upgrades.
Yep, but…a welcome improvement…wish I still had that '67 convertible…console, 8-track, turn indicators in the hood, 2-piece, glass rear window, premium stainless trim…
Actually, I do, everything kept in context. It would be overkill to effect a total, as new or better rebuild on an original engine with minimal wear. Maybe once this car’s been driven another 60,000 miles or so a complete rebuild will be in order. Not going to happen in my lifetime but I’m sure whoever takes this engine apart the next time will appreciate a closer to original starting point.
I’m after a reliable engine. Doesn’t need to be blueprinted.
